Clinical activity in general practice before sarcoma diagnosis: an Australian cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Increased time to diagnosis in sarcoma is associated with poor prognosis and patient outcomes. Research is needed to identify whether opportunities to expedite the diagnosis of sarcoma in general practice exist. AIM: To examine pre-diagnostic GP clinical activity before sarcoma diagnosis. DESIGN AND SETTING: An Australian retrospective cohort study using hospital registry data (Australian Comprehensive Cancer Outcomes and Research Database [ACCORD]) linked to two primary care datasets (Patron and MedicineInsight). METHOD: The frequency of general practice healthcare utilisation events (general practice attendances, prescriptions, blood test, and imaging requests) were compared in 377 patients with soft tissue sarcoma (STS) and 64 patients with bone sarcoma (BS) in the year pre-diagnosis. Poisson regression models were used to calculate monthly incidence rate ratios (IRR) for the 24 months pre-diagnosis and estimate inflection points for when healthcare use started to increase from baseline. RESULTS: In the 6 months pre-diagnosis, patients with sarcoma had a median of 3-4 general practice attendances, around one-third had a GP imaging request (33% [n = 21] BS and 36% [n = 134] STS), and approximately one in five had multiple imaging requests (19% [n = 12] BS and 21% [n = 80] STS). GP imaging requests progressively increased up to eight-fold from 6 months before sarcoma diagnosis (IRR 8.43, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 3.92 to 18.15, P<0.001) and general practice attendances increased from 3 months pre-diagnosis. CONCLUSION: Patients with sarcoma have increased GP clinical activity from 6 months pre-diagnosis, indicating a diagnostic window where potential opportunities exist for earlier diagnosis. Interventions to help identify patients and promote appropriate use of imaging and direct specialist centre referrals could improve earlier diagnosis and patient outcomes.

Psychosocial influences on help-seeking behaviour for cancer in low-income and lower middle-income countries: a mixed-methods systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Starting cancer treatment early can improve outcomes. Psychosocial factors influencing patients' medical help-seeking decisions may be particularly important in low and lower middle-income countries (LMIC) where cancer outcomes are poor. Comprehensive review evidence is needed to understand the psychosocial influences on medical help-seeking for cancer symptoms, attendance for diagnosis and starting cancer treatment. METHODS: Mixed-methods systematic review registered on PROSPERO (CRD42018099057). Peer-reviewed databases were searched until April 2020 for studies assessing patient-related barriers and facilitators to medical help-seeking for cancer symptoms, diagnosis and treatment in adults (18+ years) living in LMICs. Quality of included studies was assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme tool. Data were synthesised using meta-analytic techniques, meta-ethnography or narrative synthesis as appropriate. RESULTS: Of 3963 studies identified, 64 were included. In quantitative studies, use of traditional, complementary and alternative medicine (TCAM) was associated with 3.60 higher odds of prolonged medical help-seeking (95% CI 2.06 to 5.14). Qualitative studies suggested that use of TCAM was a key barrier to medical help-seeking in LMICs, and was influenced by causal beliefs, cultural norms and a preference to avoid biomedical treatment. Women face particular barriers, such as needing family permission for help-seeking, and higher stigma for cancer treatment. Additional psychosocial barriers included: shame and stigma associated with cancer such as fear of social rejection (eg, divorce/disownment); limited knowledge of cancer and associated symptoms; and financial and access barriers associated with travel and appointments. CONCLUSION: Due to variable quality of studies, future evaluations would benefit from using validated measures and robust study designs. The use of TCAM and gender influences appear to be important barriers to help-seeking in LMIC. Cancer awareness campaigns developed with LMIC communities need to address cultural influences on medical help-seeking behaviour.

The Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre lung cancer clinical audit: collecting the UK National Lung Cancer Audit data from hospitals in Australia.

BACKGROUND: Clinical audit may improve practice in cancer service provision. The UK National Lung Cancer Audit (NLCA) collects data for all new cases of thoracic cancers. AIM: To collect similar data for our Victorian patients from six hospitals within the Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre and associated Western and Central Melbourne Integrated Cancer Service. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective audit of all newly diagnosed patients with lung cancer and mesothelioma in 2013 across the six Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre/Western and Central Melbourne Integrated Cancer Service hospitals. The objectives were to adapt the NLCA data set for use in the Australian context, to analyse the findings using descriptive statistics and to determine feasibility of implementing a routine, ongoing audit similar to that in the UK. Individual data items were adapted from the NLCA by an expert steering committee. Data were collated from the Victorian Cancer Registry, Victorian Admitted Episodes Dataset and individual hospital databases. Individual medical records were audited for missing data. RESULTS: Eight hundred and forty-five patients were diagnosed across the sites in 2013. Most were aged 65-80 (55%) and were male (62%). Most had non-small-cell lung cancer (81%) with 9% diagnosed with small cell lung cancer and 2% with mesothelioma. Data completeness varied significantly between fields. For those with higher levels of completeness, headline indicators of clinical care were comparable with NLCA data. The Victorian population seem to lack access to specialist lung cancer nurse services. CONCLUSION: Lung cancer care at participating hospitals appeared to be comparable with the UK in 2013. In future, prospective data collection should be harmonised across sites and correlated with survival outcomes. One area of concern was a lack of documented access to specialist nursing services.

The Role of Primary Care Physicians in Childhood Cancer Survivorship Care: Multiperspective Interviews.

BACKGROUND: Primary care physicians (PCPs) are well placed to provide holistic care to survivors of childhood cancer and may relieve growing pressures on specialist-led follow-up. We evaluated PCPs' role and confidence in providing follow-up care to survivors of childhood cancer. SUBJECTS, MATERIALS, AND METHODS: In Stage 1, survivors and parents (of young survivors) from 11 Australian and New Zealand hospitals completed interviews about their PCPs' role in their follow-up. Participants nominated their PCP for an interview for Stage 2. In Stage 2, PCPs completed interviews about their confidence and preparedness in delivering childhood cancer survivorship care. RESULTS: Stage 1: One hundred twenty survivors (36% male, mean age: 25.6 years) and parents of young survivors (58% male survivors, survivors' mean age: 12.7 years) completed interviews. Few survivors (23%) and parents (10%) visited their PCP for cancer-related care and reported similar reasons for not seeking PCP-led follow-up including low confidence in PCPs (48%), low perceived PCP cancer knowledge (38%), and difficulty finding good/regular PCPs (31%). Participants indicated feeling "disconnected" from their PCP during their cancer treatment phase. Stage 2: Fifty-one PCPs (57% male, mean years practicing: 28.3) completed interviews. Fifty percent of PCPs reported feeling confident providing care to childhood cancer survivors. PCPs had high unmet information needs relating to survivors' late effects risks (94%) and preferred a highly prescriptive approach to improve their confidence delivering survivorship care. CONCLUSION: Improved communication and greater PCP involvement during treatment/early survivorship may help overcome survivors' and parents' low confidence in PCPs. PCPs are willing but require clear guidance from tertiary providers. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Childhood cancer survivors and their parents have low confidence in primary care physicians' ability to manage their survivorship care. Encouraging engagement in primary care is important to promote holistic follow-up care, continuity of care, and long-term surveillance. Survivors'/parents' confidence in physicians may be improved by better involving primary care physicians throughout treatment and early survivorship, and by introducing the concept of eventual transition to adult and primary services. Although physicians are willing to deliver childhood cancer survivorship care, their confidence in doing so may be improved through better communication with tertiary services and more appropriate training.

SCORE: Shared care of Colorectal cancer survivors: protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the most common cancer affecting both men and women. Survivors of CRC often experience various physical and psychological effects arising from CRC and its treatment. These effects may last for many years and adversely affect QoL, and they may not be adequately addressed by standard specialist-based follow-up. Optimal management of these effects should harness the expertise of both primary care and specialist care. Shared models of care (involving both the patient's primary care physician [PCP] and specialist) have the potential to better support survivors and enhance health system efficiency. METHODS/DESIGN: SCORE (Shared care of Colorectal cancer survivors) is a multisite randomised controlled trial designed to optimise and operationalise a shared care model for survivors of CRC, to evaluate the acceptability of the intervention and study processes, and to collect preliminary data regarding the effects of shared care compared with usual care on a range of patient-reported outcomes. The primary outcome is QoL measured using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 questionnaire. Secondary outcomes are satisfaction with care, unmet needs, continuity of care and health resource use. The shared care model involves replacement of two routine specialist follow-up visits with PCP visits, as well as the provision of a tailored survivorship care plan and a survivorship booklet and DVD for CRC survivors. All consenting patients will be randomised 1:1 to either shared care or usual care and will complete questionnaires at three time points over a 12-month period (baseline and at 6 and 12 months). Health care resource use data will also be collected and used to evaluate costs. DISCUSSION: The evaluation and implementation of models of care that are responsive to the holistic needs of cancer survivors while reducing the burden on acute care settings is an international priority. Shared care between specialists and PCPs has the potential to enhance patient care and outcomes for CRC survivors while offering improvements in health care resource efficiency. If the findings of the present study show that the shared care intervention is acceptable and feasible for CRC survivors, the intervention may be readily expanded to other groups of cancer survivors. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12617000004369p . Registered on 3 January 2017; protocol version 4 approved 24 February 2017.

A Placebo-Controlled Double-Blinded Randomized Pilot Study of Combination Phytotherapy in Biochemically Recurrent Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Men with biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer following local therapies often use natural supplements in an attempt to delay metastases and/or avoid the need for more aggressive treatments with undesirable side-effects. While there is a growing body of research into phytotherapeutic agents in this cohort, with some promising results, as yet no definitive recommendations can be made. This pilot study was undertaken to assess the feasibility of a fully-powered study to examine the effects of this phytotherapeutic intervention (containing turmeric, resveratrol, green tea and broccoli sprouts) on PSA doubling time in men with biochemical recurrence with a moderate PSA rise rate. METHODS: A double blind, randomized, placebo-controlled parallel trial was conducted with 22 men with biochemically recurrent prostate cancer and a moderate rise rate (PSA doubling time of 4-15 months and no evidence of metastases from conventional imaging methods). Patients were randomized to either the active treatment arm or placebo for 12 weeks. The primary endpoints were feasibility of study recruitment and procedures, and measurement of proposed secondary endpoints (prostate symptoms, quality of life, anxiety, and depression as measured on the EORTC QLQ-C30 and PR-25, the IPSS and HADS). Data were collected to estimate PSA-log slopes and PSA-doubling times, using a mixed model, for both the pre-intervention and post-intervention periods. RESULTS: Adherence to study protocol was excellent, and the phytotherapeutic intervention was well-tolerated, with similar numbers of mild-to-moderate adverse events in the active and placebo arms. Both the intervention and data collection methods were acceptable to participants. No statistical difference between groups on clinical outcomes was expected in this pilot study. There was between-subject variation in the PSA post treatment, but on average the active treatment group experienced a non-significant increase in the log-slope of PSA (pre-treatment doubling time = 10.2 months, post-treatment doubling time = 5.5 months), and the placebo group experienced no change in the log-slope of PSA (pre-treatment doubling time = 10.8 months, post-treatment doubling time = 10.9 months). CONCLUSION: The findings suggest that a fully powered study of this combination is feasible in men with biochemically recurrent prostate cancer and a moderate PSA rise rate. Prostate 77:765-775, 2017. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Presentations to general practice before a cancer diagnosis in Victoria: a cross-sectional survey.

OBJECTIVE: To assess variations in the number of general practitioner visits preceding a cancer diagnosis, and in the length of the interval between the patient first suspecting a problem and their seeing a hospital specialist. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Analysis of data provided to the Cancer Patient Experience Survey (CPES; survey response rate, 37.7%) by 1552 patients with one of 19 cancer types and treated in one of five Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre hospitals, 1 October 2012 - 30 April 2013. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who had had three or more GP consultations about cancer-related health problems before being referred to hospital. The secondary outcome was the interval between the patient first suspecting a problem and their seeing a hospital specialist. RESULTS: 34% of the patients included in the final analyses (426 of 1248) had visited a GP at least three times before referral to a hospital doctor. The odds ratios (reference: rectal cancer; adjusted for age, sex, language spoken at home, and socio-economic disadvantage index score) varied according to cancer type, being highest for pancreatic cancer (3.2; 95% CI, 1.02-9.9), thyroid cancer (2.5; 95% CI, 0.9-6.6), vulval cancer (2.5; 95% CI, 0.7-8.7) and multiple myeloma (2.4; 95% CI, 1.1-5.5), and lowest for patients with breast cancer (0.4; 95% CI, 0.2-0.8), cervical cancer (0.5; 95% CI, 0.1-2.1), endometrial cancer (0.5; 95% CI, 0.2-1.4) or melanoma (0.7; 95% CI, 0.3-1.5). Cancer type also affected the duration of the interval from symptom onset to seeing a hospital doctor; it took at least 3 months for more than one-third of patients with prostate or colon cancer to see a hospital doctor. CONCLUSION: Certain cancer types were more frequently associated with multiple GP visits, suggesting they are more challenging to recognise early. In Victoria, longer intervals from the first symptoms to seeing a hospital doctor for colon or prostate cancer may reflect poorer community symptom awareness, later GP referral, or limited access to gastroenterology and urology services.

Low-level laser therapy for chronic non-specific low back pain: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

OBJECTIVE: The efficacy of low-level laser treatment (LLLT) for chronic back pain remains controversial due to insufficient trial data. We aimed to conduct an updated review to determine if LLLT (including laser acupuncture) has specific benefits in chronic non-specific low back pain (CNLBP). METHODS: Electronic databases were searched for randomised trials using sham controls and blinded assessment examining the intervention of LLLT in adults with CNLBP. Primary outcomes were pain and global assessment of improvement with up to short-term follow-up. Secondary outcomes were disability, range of back movement, and adverse effects. A random effects meta-analysis was conducted. Subgroup analyses were based on laser dose, duration of baseline pain, and whether or not laser therapy used an acupuncture approach. RESULTS: 15 studies were selected involving 1039 participants. At immediate and short-term follow-up there was significant pain reduction of up to WMD (weighted mean difference) -1.40 cm (95% CI -1.91 to -0.88 cm) in favour of laser treatment, occurring in trials using at least 3 Joules (J) per point, with baseline pain <30 months and in non-acupuncture LLLT trials. Global assessment showed a risk ratio of 2.16 (95% CI 1.61 to 2.90) in favour of laser treatment in the same groups only at immediate follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated moderate quality of evidence (GRADE) to support a clinically important benefit in LLLT for CNLBP in the short term, which was only seen following higher laser dose interventions and in participants with a shorter duration of back pain. Rigorously blinded trials using appropriate laser dosage would provide greater certainty around this conclusion.

Phytotherapeutic interventions in the management of biochemically recurrent prostate cancer: a systematic review of randomised trials.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the evidence from randomised trials for the efficacy and safety of phytotherapeutic interventions in the management of biochemically recurrent (BCR) prostate cancer, indicated by prostate-specific antigen (PSA) progression, numbers progressing to/time to initiation of androgen-deprivation therapy or salvage therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: MEDLINE (Ovid), EMBASE (Ovid), AMED (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCO) and the Cochrane Library databases were searched. Clinical trials investigating phytotherapeutic interventions as dietary supplements or dietary components, including multi-component herbal formulations, in men with BCR prostate cancer were located. Eight of nine authors contacted for further information responded. Methodological quality was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias assessment tool. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement for reporting systematic reviews was followed. RESULTS: Of 23 full-text articles assessed for eligibility, five met the criteria for inclusion. Two studies were placebo controlled; two were active control trials; and one a high-/low-dose trial. The interventions were administered as isolated phytochemicals (sulphoraphane), phytotherapeutic extracts [Pomi-T (pomegranate, turmeric, green tea and broccoli sprout extract), soy, lycopene, and POMx (pomegranate extract)], or plant-derived dietary items (soy and lycopene). All studies found serum PSA levels to stabilise, decrease or rise more slowly in a significant number of men, and three studies reported stabilising or lengthening of PSA-doubling time. Studies were generally of good quality, but sample sizes were predominantly small, and durations short. CONCLUSIONS: High-quality studies in this area are lacking. Sulphoraphane, lycopene, soy isoflavones, POMx, and Pomi-T are safe and well tolerated. There is limited evidence that they can affect PSA dynamics. No recommendation can be made for the use of these agents in managing prostate cancer morbidity and mortality until high-quality, fully powered studies are available. Recommendations are made for improving reproducibility and translation of findings with regard to study population, study endpoints, design, and the reporting of phytotherapeutic interventions.

The expanding role of primary care in cancer control.

The nature of cancer control is changing, with an increasing emphasis, fuelled by public and political demand, on prevention, early diagnosis, and patient experience during and after treatment. At the same time, primary care is increasingly promoted, by governments and health funders worldwide, as the preferred setting for most health care for reasons of increasing need, to stabilise health-care costs, and to accommodate patient preference for care close to home. It is timely, then, to consider how this expanding role for primary care can work for cancer control, which has long been dominated by highly technical interventions centred on treatment, and in which the contribution of primary care has been largely perceived as marginal. In this Commission, expert opinion from primary care and public health professionals with academic and clinical cancer expertise­from epidemiologists, psychologists, policy makers, and cancer specialists­has contributed to a detailed consideration of the evidence for cancer control provided in primary care and community care settings. Ranging from primary prevention to end-of-life care, the scope for new models of care is explored, and the actions needed to effect change are outlined. The strengths of primary care­its continuous, coordinated, and comprehensive care for individuals and families­are particularly evident in prevention and diagnosis, in shared follow-up and survivorship care, and in end-of-life care. A strong theme of integration of care runs throughout, and its elements (clinical, vertical, and functional) and the tools needed for integrated working are described in detail. All of this change, as it evolves, will need to be underpinned by new research and by continuing and shared multiprofessional development.

Cancer survivorship--the role of the GP.

BACKGROUND: Improvements in cancer detection, treatment and an ageing population mean that there are increasing numbers of people living with and beyond cancer. Current hospital-centred models of cancer follow-up have tended to focus on detection of cancer recurrence, which may result in significant unmet needs, particularly psychosocial needs. OBJECTIVE: This paper discusses the evidence from previous studies of primary care involvement in cancer survivorship and key areas to consider in the follow-up care for common cancers. DISCUSSION: General practice has an important role in the holistic care of cancer survivors and could take on an expanded role in cancer follow-up.

Low-dose laser acupuncture for non-specific chronic low back pain: a double-blind randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To determine if infrared laser acupuncture (LA) may have a specific effect in reducing pain and disability in treatment of chronic low back pain (LBP). METHODS: This was a double-blind sham laser controlled trial performed in general practices in Perth, Western Australia. The participants were 144 adults with chronic non-specific LBP. They were randomised to receive eight once-weekly treatments. Laser machines (20 mW, 840 nm diode, power density 0.1 W/cm(2)) stimulated points in three treatment groups: sham (0 joules/point), low dose (0.2 J/point) and high dose (0.8 joules/point). Participants were followed-up at 1 and 6 weeks, and 6 and 12 months post treatment. Primary outcomes were pain (Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NPRS)) and disability (Oswestry Disability Inventory (ODI)) at 6 weeks post treatment. Secondary outcomes included numerical rating scale for limitation of activity, global assessment of improvement, analgesic usage and adverse effects after treatment. RESULTS: The analysis showed no difference between sham and the laser groups at 6 weeks for pain or disability. There was a significant reduction in mean pain and disability in all groups at 6 weeks (p<0.005); NPRS: sham (-1.5 (95% CI -2.1 to -0.8)), low dose (-1.3 (-2.0 to -0.8)), high dose (-1.1 (-1.7 to -0.5)). ODI: sham (-4.0 (-7.1 to -1.0)), low dose (-4.1, (-6.7 to -1.5)), high dose (-2.6 (-5.7 to 0.5)). All secondary outcomes also showed clinical improvement over time but with no differences between groups. CONCLUSIONS: LA using energy density range (0-4 J/cm(2)) for the treatment of chronic non-specific LBP resulted in clinical improvement unrelated to laser stimulation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: http://www.anzctr.org.au ACTRN12610000043033.

The role of primary care in early detection and follow-up of cancer.

Primary care providers have important roles across the cancer continuum, from encouraging screening and accurate diagnosis to providing care during and after treatment for both the cancer and any comorbid conditions. Evidence shows that higher cancer screening participation rates are associated with greater involvement of primary care. Primary care providers are pivotal in reducing diagnostic delay, particularly in health systems that have long waiting times for outpatient diagnostic services. However, so-called fast-track systems designed to speed up hospital referrals are weakened by significant variation in their use by general practitioners (GPs), and affect the associated conversion and detection rates. Several randomized controlled trials have shown primary care-led follow-up care to be equivalent to hospital-led care in terms of patient wellbeing, recurrence rates and survival, and might be less costly. For primary care-led follow-up to be successful, appropriate guidelines must be incorporated, clear communication must be provided and specialist care must be accessible if required. Finally, models of long-term cancer follow-up are needed that provide holistic care and incorporate management of co-morbid conditions. We discuss all these aspects of primary care, focusing on the most common cancers managed at the GP office-breast, colorectal, prostate, lung and cervical cancers.

Engaging community pharmacists in the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease: protocol for the Pharmacist Assessment of Adherence, Risk and Treatment in Cardiovascular Disease (PAART CVD) pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of death globally. Community pharmacist intervention studies have demonstrated clinical effectiveness for improving several leading individual CVD risk factors. Primary prevention strategies increasingly emphasise the need for consideration of overall cardiovascular risk and concurrent management of multiple risk factors. It is therefore important to demonstrate the feasibility of multiple risk factor management by community pharmacists to ensure continued currency of their role. METHODS/DESIGN: This study will be a longitudinal pre- and post-test pilot study with a single cohort of up to 100 patients in ten pharmacies. Patients aged 50-74 years with no history of heart disease or diabetes, and taking antihypertensive or lipid-lowering medicines, will be approached for participation. Assessment of cardiovascular risk, medicines use and health behaviours will be undertaken by a research assistant at baseline and following the intervention (6 months). Validated interview scales will be used where available. Baseline data will be used by accredited medicines management pharmacists to generate a report for the treating community pharmacist. This report will highlight individual patients' overall CVD risk and individual risk factors, as well as identifying modifiable health behaviours for risk improvement and suggesting treatment and behavioural goals. The treating community pharmacist will use this information to finalise and implement a treatment plan in conjunction with the patient and their doctor. Community pharmacists will facilitate patient improvements in lifestyle, medicines adherence, and medicines management over the course of five counselling sessions with monthly intervals. The primary outcome will be the change to average overall cardiovascular risk, assessed using the Framingham risk equation. DISCUSSION: This study will assess the feasibility of implementing holistic primary CVD prevention programs into community pharmacy, one of the most accessible health services in most developed countries. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australia and New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry Number: ACTRN12609000677202.